zaterdag 24 juni 2006

This week an interesting story appeared in the Washington Post – buried on page 16, of course, lest anyone think it was of the slightest importance. It revealed that documentary proof has now emerged confirming the fact that in the spring of 2003, the Bush Regime – flush with its illusory "victory" in Iraq – spurned a wide-ranging peace feeler from Iran which offered "full cooperation" on every issue that the Bushists claim to be concerned about in regard to Tehran: "nuclear programs, acceptance of Israel and the termination of Iranian support for Palestinian militant groups."The offer was made through the Swiss Embassy, which has served as the conduit for communication between Washington and Tehran since America's Peacock patsy, the Shah of Iran, was overthrown in 1979. The 2003 proposal included "full cooperation on nuclear safeguards, 'decisive action,' against terrorists, coordination in Iraq, ending 'material support' for Palestinian militias and accepting the Saudi initiative for a two-state solution in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict [which called for all Muslim states to recognize Israel]," the Post reports. The unprecedented initiative was approved by Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and then-President Mohammad Khatami – the moderate whose attempts at dialogue were mocked and undercut at every turn by the Bush Regime, helping to discredit the entire reformist movement in Iran and leading to Khatami's replacement by the militant hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.In other words, everything that George W. Bush says he wants from the Iranians now, he could have had for the asking – three years ago. What then can we conclude from the rejection of this extraordinary initiative? The answer is obvious: that the Bush Faction is not really interested in curbing nuclear proliferation or defusing the powder keg of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and the regional and global terror that it spawns. What are they interested in? This answer too is obvious, to anyone who's been paying the slightest attention to the Faction's words and actions over the years: they are interested in loot and dominion. What they want from Iran is nothing less than its return to quasi-colonial control by the crony conquistadors of the West. And they're willing to play a (reasonably) long game to get it.' Lees verder:http://chris-floyd.com/ Of: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13736.htm

Karachi - A charcteristic of a successful resistance movement is its ability to switch tactics as circumstances change, and the insurgencies in both Iraq and Afghanistan are proving to be capable in this respect.In Iraq, the US killing of the leader of al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, has provided the opportunity for al-Qaeda for the first time to take over the central command of the resistance, with the overall goal of fomenting a popular Arab uprising against the US presence.Meanwhile in Afghanistan, the Taliban, after a highly organized and fruitful - though costly in terms of casualties - mass offensive in the south of the country, is reorganizing somewhat to wage a more traditional guerrilla campaign involving carefully selected attacks.In both countries, strong new leaders are calling the shots - Abu Hamza al-Muhajir in Iraq and Jalaluddin Haqqani in Afghanistan.Al-Qaeda is proving to be flexible in other areas as well, such as in its choice of weapons and targets. Normally credible sources familiar with al-Qaeda have told Asia Times Online of a buzz within the group of plans to strike the United States with electromagnetic bombs ("e-bombs", or high-power microwave weapons). Theoretically, these could shut down telecommunications networks, disrupt power supplies and disable computers and electronic gadgets."It is true about the e-bomb and a plan to cripple US satellite systems. A section of Arab fighters is working on this," retired squadron leader Khalid Khawaja told Asia Times Online. "I actually overheard such conversations with those who interact a lot with Arab fighters in Afghanistan." Khawaja worked for Pakistan's secret service, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), and was a friend of Osama bin Laden."I never heard Osama or [his deputy] Dr [Ayman al-]Zawahiri, or anyone else, discuss nuclear attacks on the US. To me, this idea is ridiculous. Only states can use nuclear technology to destroy a country. Also, I never heard anyone discussing with any depth a gas attack on America."However, I have now overheard conversations which strongly suggest that there is a section in the anti-American resistance which is seriously pursuing a project aimed at taking America back to the Stone Age without harming human lives," Khawaja said.' Lees verder:http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HF23Ak02.html Of: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062306G.shtml

The Iraqi government declared a state of emergency and imposed a curfew Friday after insurgents set up roadblocks in central Baghdad and opened fire on U.S. and Iraqi troops outside the heavily fortified Green Zone.Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ordered everyone off the streets of the capital from 2 p.m. until 5 p.m.U.S. and Iraqi forces also fought gunmen in the volatile Dora neighborhood in south Baghdad.Two U.S. soldiers were killed when a roadside bomb struck their vehicle southeast of the capital, the U.S. military said.The military also said two U.S. Marines died in combat in volatile Anbar province in separate attacks on Wednesday and Thursday, and a soldier died elsewhere in a non-combat incident on Wednesday.At least 2,517 members of the U.S. military have died since the Iraq war started in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.A car bomb ripped through a market and nearby gas station in the increasingly violent southern city of Basra, killing at least five people and wounding 18, including two policemen, police said.A bomb also struck a Sunni mosque in Hibhib, northeast of Baghdad, killing 10 worshippers and wounding 15 in the town where Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was slain this month, police said.At least 19 other deaths were reported in Baghdad.Throughout the morning, Iraqi and U.S. military forces clashed with attackers armed with rocket-propelled grenades, hand grenades and rifles in busy Haifa Street, which runs into the Green Zone, site of the U.S. and British embassies and the Iraqi government.Four Iraqi soldiers and three policemen were wounded in the fighting, police Lt. Maitham Abdul Razzaq said.The region was sealed and Iraqi and U.S. forces conducted house-to-house searches.' Lees verder: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062306A.shtml

Nick Turse stands at the door, a frizz of curly black hair, a fringe of beard, in a dark T-shirt and green cargo pants. Slung over his shoulder is a green backpack (a water bottle sticking out of a side pouch) so stuffed that he might well have been on a week's maneuvers. When I mention its size, he says, "Genuine military surplus," smiles, and lets it drop to the floor with a thunk. Immediately, he begins rummaging inside it and soon pulls out a tiny box sporting drawings of futuristic robot warriors and covered with Japanese characters (but also with a tiny "Made in China" in English). "Knowing your tastes," he says, handing it to me. He found it at a toy store in Tokyo on his way back from Vietnam.Young as he is, he's been in the government archives for years and is one of our foremost experts on American war crimes in Vietnam. In fact, the combination of historic crimes and toys first brought us together at a diner a block from my apartment, perhaps three years ago. I had written a book, in part on Vietnam, in part on how an American "victory culture" had once expressed itself in the world of children's play. He read it and was looking for a little advice on his work. Soon after, he began sending out to friends his own homespun version of Tomdispatch and put me on his e-list.Overwhelmed by such send-outs, I ignored his for a while, but he had such an eye for the place where toys, entertainment, and the military-industrial complex merged that I finally found myself paying attention, and one day called, asking if he would write a Tomgram on the subject. The rest, as they say, is Tomdispatch history. Now, in a busy life that includes writing two books and working a couple of jobs, he spends his spare time as the site's associate editor and research director - I may not have much money to offer but titles are plentiful - and has become one of its more popular writers.As we walk into the dining room, reviewing our past history, he says wryly, "You found me in the cabbage patch." For a brief moment, at the dining room table, we're both absorbed in preparations. Cellophane wrappers come off tapes that are clicked into tape recorders. Then we seat ourselves and, for the first time since I began these interviews, I swivel my two machines so they face me.Outside, on this late spring Sunday, the sky has darkened and rain is beginning to fall. Nick says into his tape - he's the pro here, having interviewed many vets from the Vietnam era - "May 21, 2006, Turse Interview with Tom Engelhardt… " And when I give him a quizzical look, he adds, "I don't know how many tapes I've gone through and then thought: Who was I interviewing? Who is this guy?" Who is this guy turns out to be the theme of the afternoon.Nick Turse: Was there some eureka moment when you created Tomdispatch?Tom Engelhardt: It was more an endless moment - those couple of months after 9/11 when, for a guy who was supposedly politically sophisticated, my reactions were naïve as hell. I had this feeling that the horror of the event might somehow open us up to the world. It was dismaying to discover that, with the Bush administration's help, we shut the world out instead. What we engaged in were endless, repetitive rites that elevated us to the roles of greatest survivor, greatest dominator, and greatest victim, all the roles in the global drama except greatest evil one.I'm also a lifetime newspaper junkie. I just couldn't bear the narrowness and conformity of the coverage when I knew that this had been a shocking event, but that there was also a history to 9/11. It only seemed to come out of the blue. I was a book editor by profession. I had published Chalmers Johnson's prophetic Blowback two years earlier. I became intensely frustrated with the limited voices we were hearing.At the same time, watching the Bush administration operate, I became increasingly appalled. [There's a thunderclap outside.] Maybe it's dramatic license to have thunder booming in the background now.Look, I had been at the edges of the mainstream publishing world for almost thirty years and I'd done useful work. I had nothing to be embarrassed about. I also had two reasonably grown-up kids and, looking at the world in perhaps early November 2001, I had an overwhelming feeling - maybe this was the eureka moment, though it crept up on me - that I couldn't simply go on as is. We're egocentric beings. We tend to move out from the self. Children are next, then spouse, friends, relatives, your city, your nation, the world. I couldn't bear to turn this world over to my children in this shape. I had no illusions about what I could do. I wasn't imagining Tomdispatch. I just felt I had to make a gesture.' Lees verder:http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=93779 Of: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062106P.shtml

Part II Tom Englehardt: On Not Packing Your Bag and Heading Home When Things Go Wrong NT: The site has become home to diverse voices. What makes a Tomdispatch writer? Is there a defining trait you're looking for? TE: I can only explain this with an image. When I was young, we kids would go hunting for clams with our toes. The question naturally was: How do you know what a clam feels like? Of course, nobody can tell you. You just feel around until, amid the empty shells, stones, and live crabs sooner or later you hit a clam. Then you know. Ditto Tomdispatch writers. Ditto how I operate in life. Many Tomdispatch writers I already knew. I had edited their books. Tomdispatch is a non-submission site, because I'm the only one answering the mail and I'm usually working another job or two. I just can't deal. The real adventure of my site, by the way, is all those e-letters pouring in. This wows me. I check the site e-mail and there's a convoy commander from Iraq telling me about his experiences, or an anti-imperial conservative from some southern state, or residents of small towns all over America. In the nineteenth century, people fled small towns for the big city. Now, when they feel isolated, they flee onto the Internet looking for company. So I get letters regularly from people who sign off with the name of a town in Kansas or Montana or Texas, and in parentheses maybe, "pop. 250." Sometimes, they'll add something like: "From Red State Hell." Wonderful letters from people I would never in a million years meet: Iraqi exiles, Germans who want to tell me about our President, an American ex-pat in Athens who let me know that a Greek college student had recommended the site to him. Imagine that! I try to reply to everything, at least a few words. But every now and then I get an e-letter where I just go: Wow, I have to do something with this! So here's an example of how a Tomdispatch writer got started. Elizabeth de la Vega had just retired as a federal prosecutor when she wrote in. She had a few kind words about the site, but mainly she wanted to offer some comments on a piece I had posted on the Plame case. Well, I doubt I had gotten a letter from a federal prosecutor before, and her Plame comments were riveting.' Lees verder:http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=94587 Of: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062306O.shtml

vrijdag 23 juni 2006

George Orwel is an oil analyst and senior writer for both the Oil Daily and Petroleum Intelligence Weekly. He has appeared on CNN, BBC and NPR, and written for the LA Times and the Christian Science Monitor, among other publications.

In Alternet schrijft hij: 'Peak Oil = Urban Ruin.

Our economy depends so much on fossil fuel that a lack of oil without any alternative fuel sources would lead to total chaos.I have often been reminded of a Chinese saying that basically translates into something like this: Long is not forever. In other words, everything comes to an end; it doesn't matter how long it takes. I've been covering the oil industry for a long time and I often talk with many economists about the status of the market. They are a very optimistic lot. That's good because they deal with issues of wealth creation, except that when they let unreasonable optimism color their thinking in such a sway that their only concern is the short-term financial benefit, they run the risk of losing their credibility.I say that because something new is happening in the modern world. For a long time, we've been used to classical economics championed by the likes of Milton Friedman. But there is a new breed of what one might call renegade economists whose focus is not based merely on competition alone, but also on community good. These economists, just like scientists, are now debating the consequences of a world with reduced petroleum supplies. They are asking, "Why can't we start preparing for the time when we probably won't have it?" Like geologists who are now calling our attention to an oil peak, these skeptics think the oil industry is taking itself for a ride by being overly optimistic that natural resources will stay abundant. Very soon, we shall see a shift in mainstream economic thinking from unbridled, red-hot free markets to something grayish.Which brings us to the debate about peak oil. Let's just assume that world oil production peaks in about 15 years. What will that mean to us, in concrete terms? It won't mean we'll run out of oil right away. It only means that net oil availability will decline at an annual rate of about 2 percent thereafter, and we should expect that supply will be down by 20 percent by about 2035, when world population will be doubled, along with fuel consumption. This is still speculative and things might turn out differently, including development of new technologies that would make life a little easier, but it's going to a huge problem. It's safe to say that the general progression of events points to a scary future.In the last two years we have already seen a preview of this movie, in the form of oil supply not being able to keep up with demand. The result has been high fuel prices and a dent in the economy and in consumer confidence. It's important to remember that current high fuel costs aren't bad compared to what we should expect in the future. It will be a crisis when supply is so drastically reduced that it won't matter whether you have the money to pay for the fuel. As anyone knows, when money loses meaning because there's nothing you can buy with it, what you are left with is primordial existence.It's going to be tough to deal with the impact on transportation, health, agriculture, and other development issues. In the event of a general power outage, think of what would become of our metropolitan subways, our hospitals, our farms, our offices, and our houses. Our economy depends so much on fossil fuel that a lack of oil without any alternative fuel sources would lead not only to a virtual crash of the economy but to total chaos. As James Howard Kunstler points out in his book, "The Long Emergency: Surviving the Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-First Century," the US economy has gradually evolved from the use of solar energy to the artificial patterns of living subsidized by cheap fossil fuel.' Lees verder:http://alternet.org/story/37541/ Of: http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/062206EA.shtml

Het Amerikaanse Public Broadcasting Service bericht: 'The Biggest Employee Buyout in American History.

General Motors' historic offer to every employee - take the cash and walk away. The biggest employee buyout in American history. This time on NOW.

On Friday, over 100,000 General Motors auto workers must make a pivotal deal or no deal decision: stick to careers with uncertain futures, or allow GM to buy them out and walk away from jobs that many have held their entire lives. On June 23 at 8:30 p.m. on PBS's newsmagazine NOW, a former GM employee returns to Michigan to find out what happens when an entire generation of autoworkers is asked to leave so that their company may survive. The biggest employer buyout in American history, and the legacy it leaves behind. This time on NOW. Note: The NOW website at www.pbs.org/now will provide follow-up coverage to the show starting Friday morning, June 23. Features will include web-exclusive interviews, more personal stories from GM workers, and a closer look at what some see as a benefits crisis in American industry.' Zie:http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/225/index.html Of: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062206U.shtml

This may seem a bit quaint, perhaps even obsolete, but it used to be standard procedure to require intelligence before deciding to make war. Unless you have been asleep these past several months, you know that this sequence was reversed in 2002 when the White House ordered intelligence "fixed" to justify a prior decision for war on Iraq. The question today is whether that war-decision-then-intelligence sequence remains in effect as President Bush's advisers weigh whom to attack next. This is hardly a frivolous question. As the president's poll numbers sink and the embarrassment of Iraq rises, Vice President Dick Cheney, defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and presidential adviser Karl Rove no doubt are trying to choose the best way to enable Bush to polish his favorite image as "war president" in order to stem Republican losses in the mid-term elections this November. There are only two countries left in the "axis of evil." Which will it be: Iran or North Korea? Needed: Provocations Earlier this year Iran seemed to have top billing. It has long been next in line as a target for the so-called "neo-conservatives" running US policy toward the Middle East. And Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was obliging with his provocative rhetoric against Israel, rhetoric that Bush was quick to use to assure the world that the US would spring to the defense of our "ally" Israel. Why the quotes around "ally?" Simple: The US has no defense treaty with Israel. This almost always comes as a big surprise to the audiences I address. Now I have come to expect it. Few are aware that such a treaty was broached to Israel after the 1967 war. But a treaty would have required clearly-defined international borders, and Israel would have no part of that. It turns out that the Israeli government was correct in concluding it could have the best of both possible worlds. Who needs a treaty when the president of the United States keeps referring to a US commitment to spring to your defense? Iran, beware: President Bush believes, or would have Americans believe, that the American Gulliver is tightly bound to Israel and its policies, including its dictum that an Iranian nuclear weapon, or even Iranian knowledge regarding how to build one, is "unacceptable." North Korea's "provocation" goes beyond rhetoric, as Pyongyang prepares to break its moratorium, observed since 1998, on testing its long-range ballistic missile. North Korea is now estimated to have enough plutonium for a handful of nuclear warheads, which could be mounted on Taepodong missiles. Some say a Taepodong might be able to reach Alaska, Hawaii or even the West Coast. Well, just let them try. It was precisely against this threat that the Pentagon has invested $43 billion over the past five years, and eleven ground-based interceptors are now based in Alaska and California. Bring ‘em on. Oops. They don't work? Who says? The Government Accounting Office, citing "quality control procedures" that have not been rigorous enough. The GAO has even considered sending the first nine interceptors back to Boeing for "disassembly and remanufacture." According to the GAO, the Pentagon has yet to prove that the full system works.' Lees verder:http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062206R.shtml

People's Weekly World bericht: 'Ehren Watada is a 28-year-old first lieutenant in the United States Army. He joined the Army in 2003, during the run-up to the Iraq war, and turned in his resignation to protest that same war in January of 2006. His unit has been ordered to go to Iraq in late June. He is poised to become the first lieutenant to refuse to deploy to Iraq, setting the stage for what could be the biggest movement of GI resistance since the Vietnam War. He faces a court-martial, up to two years in prison for missing movement by design, a dishonorable discharge, and other possible charges. He says speaking against an illegal and immoral war is worth all of this and more. Journalist Sarah Olson spoke with Watada in late May about his reasons for joining the military, and why he wants out. Sarah Olson: When you joined the Army in 2003, what were your goals? Ehren Watada: 2003 was a couple of years after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. I had the idea that my country needed me and that I needed to serve my country. I still strongly believe that. I strongly believe in service and duty. That’s one of the reasons I joined: because of patriotism. I took an oath to the U.S. Constitution, and to the values and the principles it represents. It makes us strongly unique. We don’t allow tyranny; we believe in accountability and checks and balances, and a government that’s by and for the people. The military must safeguard those freedoms and those principles and the democracy that makes us unique. A lot of people, like myself, join the military because they love their country, and they love what it stands for. SO: You joined the Army during the run-up to the Iraq war, but you had misgivings about the war. How did that happen? Watada: Like everybody in America and around the world, I heard what they were saying on television about the stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, and the ties to al-Qaeda and 9/11. I also saw the millions of people around the world protesting, and listened to the people resigning from the government in protest. I realized that the war probably wasn’t justified until we found proof of these accusations the president and his deputies were making against Iraq. But I also believed we should give the president the benefit of the doubt. At that time, I never believed, I could never conceive of our leader betraying the trust we had in him.' Lees verder: http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/9372/1/327

The US military commander in Iraq has accused Iran of providing covert support to Shia extremists in Iraq.Iran equips and trains Shia militia groups, Gen George Casey said, adding that its influence had risen recently.Although the US has no evidence that Iranians were operating directly in Iraq, Gen Casey said "surrogates" regularly attacked US troops.He also suggested that some troops were likely to leave Iraq this year, but no final decision has yet been taken.He noted that troop levels had fallen since late 2005, and said he was "confident" more troops would leave during the rest of 2006.Gen Casey is working with the US ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, to draw up a proposal for potential US troop withdrawals.He spoke as the US Senate rejected two Democrat measures calling for troop withdrawals to begin later this year.Democrat leaders in the Senate tabled two proposals - one calling for a phased withdrawal starting in 2006, the other for all troops to be pulled out of Iraq by mid-2007.Republicans criticised the plans, labelling one "cut and run" and the other "cut and jog".' Lees verder: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5108496.stm En als deze beschuldiging maar vaak genoeg herhaald wordt door de journalistiek, net zoals Iraks massavernietigingswapens ontelbare malen werd herhaald, dan verandert het van een bewering in een feit.

De meeste keren weten we het niet eens dat we propaganda horen of zien. Door welke motieven worden de commerciele massamedia gedreven? En door welke motieven individuele journalisten? Zolang men niet weet dat Amerikaanse, Russische en Chinese oliebelangen in de zaak Iran op de achtergrond meespelen, beseft men niet wat de doorslaggevende factoren zijn. De Amerikaanse auteur Michael Klare schrijft in het alom geprezen 'Blood en Oil, The dangers and consequences of America's growing dependency on imported petroleum': 'According to ... the International Energy Outlook, total world oil production would have to grow by 60 percent between 1999 and 2020 to meet anticipated world consumption of 119 million barrels per day. But because of flat or declining production in many other areas of the world, output in the Gulf would have to climb by 85 percent to satisfy this enormous rise in demand... To meet anticipated U.S. energy demand in the years ahead while also slaking the growing thirst of other immporting nations, the Gulf producers must - as we have seen - boost their combined output by 85 percent between now and 2020... Left to themselves, the Gulf countries are unlikely to succeed; it will take continued American intervention and the sacrifice of more and more American blood to come even close. The Bush administration has chosen to preserve America's existing energy posture by tying its fortunes to Persian Gulf oil.'

De Jordan Times bericht: 'PETRA -- Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Thursdaysaid he had no commitment to carry out full withdrawalfrom territories the Jewish state seized in the1967 war.

"I have no commitment to return back to the boundaries,which are defined by my colleague Abu Mazen [Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas] or by other Palestinians," Olmert told Nobel peace laureate Elie Wiesel during a chat attended by 24 prize winners. "We will argue about it, we will negotiate about it, but there will be blocks of settlements that will remain, they can't be evacuated, they will not be evacuated," said Olmert, shortly after meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas at a breakfast hosted by King Abdullah.

"But a large part will be evacuated by Israel and will bea contiguous territory, where Palestinians will be able to realise their dream of building their own state."

Abbas told a similar session on Wednesday that he wouldwork out an "eternal" peace treaty if Israel returns backto the 1967 border.

"The political power is not with Abbas. It is withgovernment that is controlled by Hamas. I will notnegotiate with them [the movement]," said Olmert. He set conditions to negotiate with the Palestinian Authority: The disarmament of the "terrorist organisations", the full implementation of all agreements signed between the two sides and the formal recognition of Israel's right to exist.' Zie: http://jordantimes.com/fri/news/news3.htm

De Guardian bericht: 'Climbdown as Hamas Agrees to Israeli State. Negotiator says group recognises right to exist. Hope for end to crippling sanctions on Palestinians.

Hamas has made a major political climbdown by agreeing to sections of a document that recognise Israel's right to exist and a negotiated two-state solution, according to Palestinian leaders. In a bitter struggle for power, Hamas is bowing to an ultimatum from the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, to endorse the document drawn up by Palestinian security prisoners in Israeli jails, or face a national referendum on the issue that could see the Islamist group stripped of power if it loses. But final agreement on the paper, designed to end international sanctions against the Hamas government that have crippled the Palestinian economy, has been slowed by wrangling over a national unity administration and the question of who speaks for the Palestinians. Yasser Abed Rabbo, a member of the Palestine Liberation Organisation's executive committee and a lead negotiator on the prisoners' document, said Hamas had agreed to sections which call for a negotiated and final agreement with Israel to establish a Palestinian state on the territories occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem. "Hamas is prepared to accept those parts of the document because they think it is a way to get rid of a lot of its problems with the international community. That's why it will accept all the document eventually," he said. Hamas, facing a deep internal split over recognition of the Jewish state, declined to discuss the negotiations in detail. If it formally approves the entire document, it will represent a significant shift from its founding goal of replacing Israel with an Islamic state and its more recent position of agreeing a long-term ceasefire, over a generation or more, if a Palestinian state is formed on the occupied territories but without formally recognising the Jewish state. Mr Abed Rabbo said he expected an agreement in the coming days, but that important differences still had to be settled, particularly over the document's call for the formation of a national unity government. He described that as "the major issue that will determine the fate of two nations for decades" because a unity administration, built around a common policy of negotiations with Israel, would be the only way to combat its plans to unilaterally impose its final borders and annex parts of the occupied territories. More immediately, this was also the only way to restore foreign aid. But Mr Abed Rabbo added it would be a mistake to see the approval of the prisoners' document as sufficient, in itself, to end international sanctions against the Palestinian Authority. "The document calls for the foundation of a national unity government as the basis of a new programme that will approach the world," he said.' Lees verder:http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1803008,00.html Of:http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062206K.shtml

5,000 Years of EmpireThe Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community

By what name will future generations know our time?

Will they speak in anger and frustration of the time of the GreatUnraveling, when profligate consumption exceeded Earth's capacity tosustain and led to an accelerating wave of collapsing environmentalsystems, violent competition for what remained of the planet'sresources, and a dramatic dieback of the human population? Or willthey look back in joyful celebration on the time of the GreatTurning, when their forebears embraced the higher-order potential oftheir human nature, turned crisis into opportunity, and learned tolive in creative partnership with one another and Earth?

A defining choice

We face a defining choice between two contrasting models fororganizing human affairs. Give them the generic names Empire andEarth Community. Absent an understanding of the history andimplications of this choice, we may squander valuable time andresources on efforts to preserve or mend cultures and institutionsthat cannot be fixed and must be replaced.

Empire organizes by domination at all levels, from relations amongnations to relations among family members. Empire brings fortune tothe few, condemns the majority to misery and servitude, suppressesthe creative potential of all, and appropriates much of the wealth ofhuman societies to maintain the institutions of domination.

Earth Community, by contrast, organizes by partnership, unleashes thehuman potential for creative co-operation, and shares resources andsurpluses for the good of all. Supporting evidence for thepossibilities of Earth Community comes from the findings of quantumphysics, evolutionary biology, developmental psychology,anthropology, archaeology, and religious mysticism. It was the humanway before Empire; we must make a choice to re-learn how to live byits principles.

Developments distinctive to our time are telling us that Empire hasreached the limits of the exploitation that people and Earth willsustain. A mounting perfect economic storm born of a convergence ofpeak oil, climate change, and an imbalanced U.S. economy dependent ondebts it can never repay is poised to bring a dramatic restructuringof every aspect of modern life. We have the power to choose, however,whether the consequences play out as a terminal crisis or an epicopportunity. The Great Turning is not a prophecy. It is a possibility.' Lees verder:http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=1463

De Amerikaanse auteur William Blum schrijft: 'Great Moments in the History of Imperialism.

National Public Radio foreign correspondent Loren Jenkins, serving in NPR's Baghdad bureau, met earlier this month with a senior Shiite cleric, a man who was described in the NPR report as "a moderate" and as a person trying to lead his Shiite followers into practicing peace and reconciliation. He had been jailed by Saddam Hussein and forced into exile. Jenkins asked him: "What would you think if you had to go back to Saddam Hussein?" The cleric replied that he'd "rather see Iraq under Saddam Hussein than the way it is now."[1]

When one considers what the people of Iraq have experienced as a result of the American bombings, invasion, regime change, and occupation since 2003, should this attitude be surprising, even from such an individual? I was moved to compile a list of the many kinds of misfortune which have fallen upon the heads of the Iraqi people as a result of the American liberation of their homeland. It's depressing reading, and you may not want to read it all, but I think it's important to have it summarized in one place.

Loss of a functioning educational system. A 2005 UN study revealed that 84% of the higher education establishments have been "destroyed, damaged and robbed".

The intellectual stock has been further depleted as many thousands of academics and other professionals have fled abroad or have been mysteriously kidnapped or assassinated in Iraq; hundreds of thousands, perhaps a million, other Iraqis, most of them from the vital, educated middle class, have left for Jordan, Syria or Egypt, many after receiving death threats. "Now I am isolated," said a middle-class Sunni Arab, who decided to leave. "I have no government. I have no protection from the government. Anyone can come to my house, take me, kill me and throw me in the trash."[2]

Loss of a functioning health care system. And loss of the public's health. Deadly infections including typhoid and tuberculosis are rampaging through the country. Iraq's network of hospitals and health centers, once admired throughout the Middle East, has been severely damaged by the war and looting.

The UN's World Food Program reported that 400,000 Iraqi children were suffering from "dangerous deficiencies of protein". Deaths from malnutrition and preventable diseases, particularly amongst children, already a problem because of the 12 years of US-imposed sanctions, have increased as poverty and disorder have made access to a proper diet and medicines ever more difficult.

Thousands of Iraqis have lost an arm or a leg, frequently from unexploded US cluster bombs, which became land mines; cluster bombs are a class of weapons denounced by human rights groups as a cruelly random scourge on civilians, particularly children.

Depleted uranium particles, from exploded US ordnance, float in the Iraqi air, to be breathed into human bodies and to radiate forever, and infect the water, the soil, the blood, the genes, producing malformed babies. During the few weeks of war in spring 2003, A10 "tankbuster" planes, which use munitions containing depleted uranium, fired 300,000 rounds.

And the use of napalm as well. And white phosphorous.The American military has attacked hospitals to prevent them from giving out casualty figures of US attacks that contradicted official US figures, which the hospitals had been in the habit of doing.' Lees verder: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13719.htm

donderdag 22 juni 2006

A Week of Israeli Restraint* Tanya ReinhartYediot Aharonot, June 21, 2006, Translated from Hebrew by Mark Marshall(Footnotes added)In Israeli discourse, Israel is always the side exercising restraint in itsconflict with the Palestinians. This was true again for the events of thepast week: As the Qassam rockets were falling on the Southern Israeli townof Sderot, it was "leaked" that the Israeli Minister of Defense haddirected the army to show restraint.1During the week of Israeli restraint, the army killed a Palestinian familywho went on a picnic on the Beit Lahya beach in the Gaza Strip; after that,the army killed nine people in order to liquidate a Katyusha rocket. But inthe discourse of restraint, the first killing does not count, because thearmy denied its involvement, and the second was deemed a necessary act ofself-defense. After all, Israel is caught in the midst of Qassam attacks,and must defend its citizens. In this narrative, the fact that Israel iscontent merely to bombard the Gaza Strip from air, sea and land is a modelof restraint and humanity that not many states could match.But what is driving the Qassam attacks on Israel? For 17 months, since itdeclared a cease fire, Hamas has not been involved in firing Qassams. Theother organizations have generally succeeded in launching only a fewisolated Qassams. How did this evolve into an attack of something like 70Qassams in three days?The Israeli army has a long tradition of "inviting" salvoes of Qassams. InApril of last year, Sharon took off to a meeting with Bush in which hiscentral message was that Abbas is not to be trusted, has no control of theground, and cannot be a partner for negotiations. The army took care toprovide an appropriate backdrop for the meeting. On the eve of Sharon'sdeparture, on 9 April 2005, the Israeli army killed three youths on theRafah border, who according to Palestinian sources were playing soccerthere. This arbitrary killing inflamed a wave of anger in the Gaza Strip,which had been relatively quiet until then. Hamas responded to the anger onthe street, and permitted its people to participate in the firing ofQassams. On the following two days, about 80 Qassams were fired, untilHamas restored calm. Thus, during the Sharon-Bush meeting, the worldreceived a perfect illustration of the untrustworthiness of Abbas.2At the beginning of last week (11 June), Olmert set out on a campaign ofpersuasion in Europe to convince European leaders that now, with Hamas inpower, Israel definitely has no partner. The USA does not appear to needany convincing at the moment, but in Europe there is more reservation aboutunilateral measures. The Israeli army began to prepare the backdrop on thenight of the previous Thursday (8 June 2006), when it "liquidated" JamalAbu Samhanada, who had recently been appointed head of the security forcesof the Interior Ministry by the Hamas government. It was entirelypredictable that the action may lead to Qassam attacks on Sderot.Nevertheless, the army proceeded the following day to shell the Gaza coast(killing the Ghalya family and wounding tens of people), and succeeded inigniting the required conflagration, until Hamas again ordered its people,on 14 June, to cease firing.This time, the show orchestrated by the army got a bit messed up. Picturesof the child Huda Ghalya succeeded in breaching the wall of Westernindifference to Palestinian suffering. Even if Israel still has enoughpower to force Kofi Annan to apologize for casting doubt on Israel'sdenial, the message that Hamas is the aggressive side in the conflict didnot go unchallenged in the world this time. But the army has not given up.It appears determined to continue to provoke attacks that would justifybringing down the Hamas government by force, with Sderot paying the price.Even though it is impossible to compare the sufferings of the residents ofSderot with the sufferings of the residents of Beit Hanoun and Beit Lahiyain the North of the Gaza Strip, on which 5,000 shells fell in the pastmonth alone3, my heart also goes out to the residents of Sderot. It istheir destiny to live in fear and agony, because in the eyes of the armytheir suffering is necessary so that the world may understand that Israelis the restrained side in a war for its very existence.=====* This op-ed went to press an hour before the Israeli air force killedthree more children in a crowded street in North Gaza, on Tuesday, June 20. 1. On Monday, June 12, the headlines announced that the Defence MinisterPeretz blocked an initiative of the army to launch a massive land offensivein Gaza (e.g. Amos Har'el and Avi Issacharoff, Ha'aretz, June 12, 2006). Inthe inside pages of the weekend papers, it turned out that this was a"media spin" produced by Peretz bureau "based on a security consultationheld the previous night" (Avi Issacharoff and Amos Harel, Lost innocents,Ha'aretz, June 16-17, 2006).2. This sequence of events is documented in detail in my book The Road Mapto Nowhere, to appear in July, 2006 (Verso).3. Alex Fishman, Senior security analyst of Yediot Aharonot reports that atthe beginning "the artillery shelling of the Gaza strip was debated", butthen, "what started ten months ago with dozens of shells a month that werefired at open areas today reached astronomical numbers of shells. Thebattery that fired the six shells on Friday [June 9] fire an average ofmore than a thousand shells a week towards the north of the Strip. Thismeans that the battery which has been placed there for four weeks hasalready fired about 5000 (!) shells" (Yediot Aharonot Saturday Supplement,June 16, 2006).

THERE will likely be "significant fighting" in southern Afghanistan in the coming months, the US-led coalition said today as 50 people, mostly Taliban, were killed in fresh violence.The rebels were operating in larger groups and "fighting hard" against security forces penetrating new areas, coalition spokesman Colonel Tom Collins told reporters in the capital Kabul. The past weeks have seen some of the biggest battles in Afghanistan since the Taliban were removed from power by a US-led coalition in late 2001 for sheltering the al-Qaeda terror network.The surge in violence coincided with the launch of the biggest yet coalition and Afghan operation in the south, Mountain Thrust.The operation had resulted in the killing of more than 90 militants since it kicked off in mid-May in four southern provinces, Colonel Collins said."People should expect significant fighting in certain areas of the south over the coming months," he said."Clearly the enemy is resisting the coalition and the Afghan National Army's efforts in the areas that they haven't previously operated in," he said."We're seeing the enemy operate in larger groups. They're fighting hard, they're clearly trying to stop our efforts to move into certain areas."Mountain Thrust involves thousands of coalition troops, mainly Americans, British and Canadians, and Afghan forces and is being conducted in southern Kandahar province - the birthplace of the Taliban - and Helmand, Uruzgan and Zabul.A suicide bomber detonated a car bomb on a coalition convoy near Kandahar city late today killing one Afghan and wounding seven others, one of them seriously, authorities and medics said."Seven people were injured, including a policeman, and a civilian was killed," Daud Ahmadi, a spokesman for the governor of Kandahar province, said.' Lees verder:http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,19550924%255E1702,00.html

Het verspreiden van democratie en mensenrechten is een zware klus. MSNBC bericht: '7 Marines, 1 sailor charged with murder. Accused service members held over April 26 death of Iraqi civilian.

WASHINGTON - Seven Marines and a sailor have been charged with murder in the April death of an Iraqi civilian, the Marine Corps said Wednesday.All eight also were charged with kidnapping, according to a Marine statement issued at Camp Pendleton, Calif. Other charges include conspiracy, larceny and providing false official statements.Separately, the U.S. military in Iraq announced that murder charges were filed against a fourth Army soldier in the shooting deaths May 9 of three civilians who had been detained by U.S. troops. Spc. Juston R. Graber, 20, of the 101st Airborne Division was charged with one count of premeditated murder, one count of attempted premeditated murder, one count of conspiracy to commit murder, and making a false official statement.Accused held in military jailOn Monday the military had announced that three soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division were charged with murder and other offenses in connection with the May 9 killings. It was not clear why charges against the fourth soldier were not announced until Wednesday.In the case of the April 26 killing of an Iraqi civilian, the allegation is that Marines pulled an unarmed man from his home in Hamdania and shot him to death without provocation. Seven Marines and one Navy corpsman from the Pendleton-based 3rd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment were taken out of Iraq and put in the brig pending the filing of charges.' Lees verder:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13459928/

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The speaker of Iraq's parliament asked the U.S. ambassador on Wednesday to investigate the killing by U.S. troops of "many innocent people" at a poultry farm in a village northeast of Baghdad.The U.S. military, in the spotlight over murder charges it has brought against troops accused of killing Iraqis, said all 15 people killed in Tuesday's raid near Baquba were gunmen.Aides to parliamentary speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani said in a statement that he had asked U.S. envoy Zalmy Khalilzad to launch a "quick and transparent investigation"."The speaker demanded the U.S. forces stop such ... mistakes," it said. "The Iraqi leadership should not fail to take action in order to stop the bloodshed of ... Iraqis."Mashhadani is a Sunni Arab, elected in April to an office reserved for the minority under power-sharing conventions to distribute posts among Sunnis, Kurds and majority Shi'ites.On Tuesday, the U.S. military said its forces hunting Sunni insurgents linked to al Qaeda killed 15 gunmen in simultaneous raids. Residents of Qaduri Ali al Shahin village 13 km (9 miles) north of Baquba said the dead were employees of a poultry farm.The Sunni Muslim Scholars Association, which is sharply critical of the U.S. occupation, condemned "this crime".The U.S. military is particularly sensitive to allegations against troops in Iraq since 24 Iraqis were killed during action by U.S. Marines at Haditha in November. The case has stirred passions in the way prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib did in 2004.' Lees verder:http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-06-21T182939Z_01_MAC162918_RTRUKOT_0_TEXT0.xml&WTmodLoc=NewsArt-L1-RelatedNews-1

Ashton B. Carter was assistant secretary of defense under President Bill Clinton and William J. Perry was secretary of defense. The writers, who conducted the North Korea policy review while in government, are now professors at Harvard and Stanford, respectively.

Het tweetal schrijft in de Washington Post: 'If Necessary, Strike and DestroyNorth Korean technicians are reportedly in the final stages of fueling a long-range ballistic missile that some experts estimate can deliver a deadly payload to the United States. The last time North Korea tested such a missile, in 1998, it sent a shock wave around the world, but especially to the United States and Japan, both of which North Korea regards as archenemies. They recognized immediately that a missile of this type makes no sense as a weapon unless it is intended for delivery of a nuclear warhead.A year later North Korea agreed to a moratorium on further launches, which it upheld -- until now. But there is a critical difference between now and 1998. Today North Korea openly boasts of its nuclear deterrent, has obtained six to eight bombs' worth of plutonium since 2003 and is plunging ahead to make more in its Yongbyon reactor. The six-party talks aimed at containing North Korea's weapons of mass destruction have collapsed.Should the United States allow a country openly hostile to it and armed with nuclear weapons to perfect an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of delivering nuclear weapons to U.S. soil? We believe not. The Bush administration has unwisely ballyhooed the doctrine of "preemption," which all previous presidents have sustained as an option rather than a dogma. It has applied the doctrine to Iraq, where the intelligence pointed to a threat from weapons of mass destruction that was much smaller than the risk North Korea poses. (The actual threat from Saddam Hussein was, we now know, even smaller than believed at the time of the invasion.) But intervening before mortal threats to U.S. security can develop is surely a prudent policy.' Lees verder:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/21/AR2006062101518.html

For more details, please contact:Casey Currie at 313-303-4458Email: kcurrie45@sbcglobal.net

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

PRESBYTERIANS CHALLENGE CORPORATIONS THAT SUPPORT ISRAEL’S OCCUPATION OF PALESTINE

(BIRMINGHAM) June 21, 2006 – Facing pressure from powerful Jewish lobbyists, the Presbyterian Church (USA)’s (PCUSA) 217 General Assembly adopted a resolution to replace the previous assembly’s language calling for “phased, selective divestment from corporations that profit from the illegal occupation of Palestine.” The new resolution does not rescind the 2004 resolution.This year’s resolution supports Mission Responsibility Through Investment (MRTI)’s customary process of corporate engagement that holds divestment as a last option. The resolution states “that financial investments as they pertain to Israel, Gaza, East Jerusalem and the West Bank be invested in only peaceful pursuits, and calls for the customary corporate engagement process.”The PC(USA) has continued its stand for moral integrity according to representatives from the Israel/Palestine Mission Network, the Mideast Caucus of the PCUSA, Jewish Voices for Peace and various grassroots organizations. In addition, the Presbyterian Church, through this resolution, continues to oppose Israel’s continued illegal occupation of Palestine and calls on the Israeli government to abide by international law.Palestinians are facing a humanitarian catastrophe. United Nations reports reveal that 60% of Palestinians are now living in acute poverty and that over half of all Palestinians are completely dependent on food aid. This rise in poverty levels is a direct result of Israel’s policies of occupation, including road closures, the construction of barriers, checkpoints, a 25’ separation wall and restrictions on the movement of Palestinian crops and products.

On Tuesday, June 13th, while Mr. Bush spent a brave five hours in the "green zone" of Baghdad with puppet Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, at least 36 people were killed across Iraq amidst a wave of bombings. 18 of those died in a spasm of bombings in the oil city of Kirkuk in the Kurdish north.The minute word hit the streets in Baghdad of Bush's visit, over 2,000 supporters of Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr took to the streets in protest. The protestors chanted "Iraq is for the Iraqis," and Sadr aide Hazem al-Araji publicly condemned the peek-a-boo visit of who he referred to as "the leader of the occupation."Day OneThe very next day, not coincidentally, Maliki instituted the biggest security crackdown in the capital city since the US invaded Iraq, dubbed "Operation Forward Together." An estimated 75,000 US and Iraqi soldiers clogged the already seriously congested streets of Baghdad, using tanks and armored vehicles to man checkpoints, impose a more strict curfew in liberated Baghdad (9 p.m. - 6 a.m. as opposed to the more generous 11 p.m. - 6 a.m.) and attempt to impose a weapons ban.Just after "The Operation" began, a car bomb detonated, killing one person while wounding five others. Major General Mahdi al-Gharrawi who commands "public order forces" under the deadly umbrella of the controversial Interior Ministry, made a statement for which George Orwell would have been proud: "Baghdad is divided according to geographical area, and we know the al-Qaeda leaders in each area," he told reporters. "We are expecting clashes will erupt in the predominantly Sunni areas." So Sunnis in Iraq, according to Gharrawi, are tied to al-Qaeda.Lest we forget, the Iraqi "army" ran a similar draconian security crackdown in Baghdad in May 2005 called "Operation Lightning." That one, too, was tens of thousands of Iraqi "police" and "soldiers" backed by American troops and air support. That operation, rather than quell violence in the capital, effectively alienated the Sunni populations in the city due to rampant death squad activities, mass detentions and heavy-handed tactics. Civilians across Baghdad complained about the mass detentions, random violence and torture meted out by the death squads during that "operation." And we see how well that operation managed to improve security in Baghdad over the last year.So here we go again - only this time with even more troops, raiding even more homes, manning more checkpoints, and of course more death squads operating - with backup support from American soldiers, and of course their air strikes.Iraq's puppet prime minister, in an effort to sooth the fear in the hearts of Baghdad's residents who are concerned about more detentions, random violence and "torture by electric drill" which the US-backed Shia death squads prefer with their victims, told reporters of the operation, "The raids during this plan will be very tough ... because there will be no mercy towards those who show no mercy to our people."The same day "Operation Forward Together" began and the day after Bush bid farewell to Baghdad, Wednesday, he dismissed calls for a US withdrawal as "election-year" politics. Refusing to give a timetable for withdrawal or some kind of benchmark with which to measure success that may allow troops to be brought home, Bush said simply, "It's bad policy," at a news conference in the Rose Garden. He thought it would "endanger our country" to pull out of Iraq before we "accomplish the mission." Of his visit to Baghdad, Bush said, "I sense something different happening in Iraq."' Lees verder:http://www.dahrjamailiraq.com/hard_news/archives/newscommentary/000406.php#more

Some weeks ago I heard Jan Wijenberg, a retired Dutch Ambassador, speak about what the International Community could do to break with its complicity to the ongoing violations of international law and human rights by the Israeli regime. Wijenberg served over a decade as an ambassador for the Dutch government in Jemen, Tanzania and Saudi Arabia. He regularly writes to Dutch ministers and politicians to remind them of the responsibility of the international community, and specifically of the Dutch Government and the European Union, to hold Israel accountable to international law. His views are expressed in this article.Israel is the problemQuite often is spoken about the conflict in the Middle East between the Palestinians and Israel. If we look at the situation more closely we can observe something different. The media in Israel provide a platform for unpunished, insane calls for murdering peoples and a nation. An example is offered by Professor Arnon Sofer talking about Palestinians living in closed-off Gaza, "...those people will become even bigger animals than they are today, with the aid of an insane fundamentalist Islam... So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day. If we don't kill we will cease to exist....."1In 2005 Ehud Barak stated on Dutch television2 that - in a secret and illegal retaliatory campaign against the Palestinian hostage takers at the Munich Olympic Winter Games - he personally had murdered thirteen innocent citizens. According to Barak this would teach the world not to fool around with Israel. Barak was and is not prosecuted for premeditated murder and could achieve the position of the country's prime minister.Among the settlers in the occupied Palestinian territories are opportunists and extremely violent Israeli's who aim to occupy East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. The Palestinians must be driven out of these territories by all means possible, including murder. The government of Israel supports the settlers in full while they lay there hands on Palestinian property and act out their violence on Palestinians.The annexation of East Jerusalem by Ehud Olmert while he was the mayor of West-Jerusalem can according to the Fourth Geneva Convention be interpreted as a war crime. After the last elections in Israel Ehud Olmert's Kadima party won the vote and he is now the Prime Minister of Israel.Israeli policies are driven by the Zionist ideal of creating a Jewish state, including the Palestinian territories. Israel is aiming systematically at destroying the identity of the Palestinian people. The so called "conflict in the Middle East" between Palestinians and Israel does not exist. Zionist Israel is the problem.Rogue stateIsrael is the world's sole remaining occupying colonial power. It systematically sabotages all international efforts to end the occupation. In its capacity of occupying power Israel violates numerous obligations emanating from Security Council Resolutions and the Geneva Conventions. It also breaches the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.' Lees verder: http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4825.shtml